I’m not surprised. I wonder if this relates to the personnel investigation brought by the city attorney earlier this year, or his role in the election contest. During the June 15th council meeting, the city attorney gave a presentation on him allegedly making unauthorized changes to public documents, and removing his signature block from a resolution in February. The city attorney was prepared to present additional findings on his conduct, but three council members refused to waive attorney-client privilege during the meeting. He was subsequently placed on leave soon after. While I understand the need to protect the city from costly litigation, I’m more concerned about the lack of transparency around this issue.

Having to see that one council member who also voted for Solarzano’s exit package and eats during public meetings, chewing with her mouth open and even picking her teeth on camera is nauseating.

Solarzano barged into his job like a bull in a china shop. He allegedly bossed people around, gave legal advice, changed city documents and seemed to conspire against the city attorney. He’s no loss for EPA.